On Sunday, we ran two pieces about the county’s lawsuit against
the Kitsap Rifle and Revolver Club, which you can read
here and
here. Also, here’s a link to our overall
coverage of the suit. And some of the points he makes were
already addressed in a
previous story.

Here’s Hauge’s post:

Please consider this my response to the “narrative” that has
been created about recent actions by my office. I am
responsible for those actions and it is fair that I be judged on
them. However, the basis for that judgment should be fact—not
a construct created to further a political agenda.

Fact One: I am not anti-gun. No one has asked me
about this directly. The truth is that I own many firearms,
mostly handguns, and have shot them regularly since I was a
child. I hunt occasionally and practice with my handguns as
often as I can. Usually I use the indoor range at “The
Marksman” in Puyallup.

Fact Two: I have no personal grudge against Marcus Carter.
Indeed, before we learned he was manufacturing machine guns I
regularly assisted him in his firearm safety classes. I
taught the lesson about firearms and the law. In those
classes, I tried to make this one point above all: The constitution
of the State of Washington unambiguously grants its citizens the
right to bear arms in defense of themselves and their homes;
however, that right carries with it great responsibilities.
The statutes of the State of Washington spell out the rules for the
possession and use of firearms. My office will support lawful
use and respond immediately and firmly to unlawful use.

Fact Three: My office has not repeatedly prosecuted Mr.
Carter. There is one pending action. Twice Kitsap
County Superior Court judges, using different reasons, have
prevented us from taking the case to a jury. Twice, the next
higher court, the Court of Appeals, has said they were wrong and
sent the case back for trial. There is nothing extraordinary
about our office appealing a ruling of the superior court.
Judges can make mistakes, and an appeal is the mechanism to correct
their errors. We are pursuing this not because I hate guns,
but because machine guns are inherently dangerous and we think the
law is clear. A local judge has blocked the trial yet again
on a new theory raised just before trial. We have again
appealed and expect the case to be sent back for trial sometime
this year. But appellate courts keep their own schedule;
that’s why it’s taken so long. We will pursue this
prosecution. There is no question that Mr. Carter
manufactured and possessed a machine gun. The reports are
part of the public record. There is a video tape of the
weapon firing on full auto that no news agency has ever asked to
see. My office cannot ignore this clear violation of the
law. To do so would be to effectively authorize the
manufacture and possession of machine guns in our community.
If that is to be the rule, it should be established by the
legislature or the courts. Thus far, the court that counts,
the Court of Appeals, has agreed with us.

Fact Four: Our goal has never been to close the Kitsap
Rifle and Revolver Club. Our position is set forth in a
letter we sent to the club in May of this year. We’ve
provided more than one copy of this letter to every local
news outlet, but no one has seen fit to print it. It is
posted on our portion of the County’s website http://www.kitsapgov.com/pros/krrc.htm ( Complaint,
beginning on pg. 72). It is an attachment to the core
document in this suit, the Complaint. In summary our position
has been that we have credible information that the Club may have
violated variety of permitting, zoning, and environmental
laws. It is our job to address those concerns. We have
asked the Club’s cooperation in resolving these issues but received
no helpful response. Very recently, credible information came
to us that there may be significant safety concerns. By all
reports, the range officers at the club do an outstanding
job. Every shooter is made to follow appropriate
procedures. But the day-to-day operation of the ranges is not
the issue. The concerns arise from the layout of the ranges
themselves. There are standards in the shooting industry to
address these issues. They exist to ensure peaceful
co-existence of gun clubs with their neighbors. The Club’s
facilities have expanded beyond those that existed when it was
“grandfathered” into the current zoning code. This expansion
makes those industry standards relevant. Like the machine gun
case, my office would be giving its approval to what might well be
law violations affecting public safety if we ignored this
situation.

Fact Five: The land use action concerning the club did not
spring up just in time for me to use it in a political
campaign. The dialog between the regulatory agencies, the
Club, and the surrounding property owners has been going on for
years http://www.kitsapgov.com/pros/krrc.htm (The Mount
Document, photos 1994-2009 pgs 20, 67, 71 and 73). It was
filed now because the Club leadership has refused to engage in that
dialog in any kind of constructive manner. Indeed, it
is just as reasonable to assume that the Club orchestrated this
crisis to coincide with the upcoming election. As I’ve said
before, I certainly recognize that I’m not doing my reelection
campaign any good by filing this action now.

Prosecutors do not—and should not—have the authority pick and
choose among the laws they are sworn to enforce. We do indeed
have to make choices about how to expend our resources, but those
choices should be guided by principle. I have been advised
that the politically expedient thing to do would be to look the
other way and in effect authorize the manufacture of machine guns
and the violation of our community’s environmental and zoning
protections. Certainly that’s the consensus in the
blogosphere. But that’s not how it works. The
prosecutor’s first duty is not to hew to any party line or even to
get reelected. The prosecutor’s job is to enforce the law as
best they can. That’s all I’m trying to do.

Hauge sounds reasonable about this issue. It’s been under some kind of investigation for many years, the legal process is incredibly slow, and unregistered machine guns, and zoning and environmental violations are valid concerns. Sounds like “Silly Season”, aka, campaign season, again. I can’t see how Hauge would use this in his own favor, in a gun-friendly county, so judging by the usual self-interest measure, it seems Hauge’s just doin’ his job.

Hmmm. Machine guns! Gun Range falling out of latest spec’s to keep up with changing times for safety! Possibility of our local newspaper trying to drum up sales with slightly slanted reporting by not reporting ALL the facts as to the actual events that have taken place between the parties and it’s status so the public can decide on it’s own as to which side they stand on. Like watching our own local version of Fox News (Republican’s) and MSNBC news (Democrat’s) spinning the news to drum up the controversy. The Gun club need’s the NRA / benefactors to step in with cash to bring the range up to code and ALSO have on the premises the indoor facility that is a MUST for firearm fan’s to experience rush of the firing of automatic weapon’s. Times do change and the constitution has evolved keep up with the spirit of the law’s that were written to encompass the unforeseen weapon capability of our time. Both parties need to sit down and fix this before someone outside the local area makes that decision for you.

About a year ago Kitsap County Commissioners, Josh brown specfically promised the new land deal that effected the rifle range would have no detrimental effect on the orgainzation . The facts are coming in , a lawsuit against the Prosector may indeed be implemented, Hauge is in defense mode , partsians coming to his defense should realize he is not that popular in his own circle and their reasoning for supporting him is part of the problem throughout politics .

In this case He is a democrat in the good old boys network .
Arrogance defended by humility is seen quickly for what it is.

“We are pursuing this not because I hate guns, but because machine guns are inherently dangerous and we think the law is clear.”

Uh, hey Einstein, ALL guns are inherently dangerous, that’s their purpose! If I ever had need to use my gun in self defense, it better be dangerous. It might help also, if you define what you consider a ‘machine gun’ as that term has different meanings depending on the agenda of the person using it.

Can anyone please explain why a convicted felon who killed a Bremerton police k-9, and shot at a bremerton police officer got a slap on the hand With no appeal from Mr Hauge. We need a prosecutor to go after criminals not good standing law abiding citizens.

Please explain how a malfunctioning rifle in the care of a duly licenced gunsmith suddenly becomes a “machine gun”? Guns are complicated mechanisims and can fail to function as designed which has happened in the Carter case. The States own expert witness has testified that the rifle isn’t a machine gun, and the courts have tossed this case repeatedly.Right now the County is being sued for the return of Mr. Carter’s private property. Hauge is clearly out for Mr. Carter and if he has to get to him through the KRRC he will.